Case law

Silliman v. Cassell (In Re Cassell)

443 B.R. 200 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Dec 7, 2010

Moreover, the Bankruptcy Code exemptions exclude from exemption plans established by an insider that provide for payments on account of age or length of service and that do not qualify under certain specific Internal Revenue … The Trustee argues that the source of the funds acquiring the annuity must be from wages for the annuity to qualify for the exemption.

South Bay Expressway, L.P. v. Otay River Constructors (In Re South Bay Expressway, L.P.)

434 B.R. 589 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · Jul 28, 2010

Since the record establishes the mechanic’s liens are asserted only against Debtors’ property interests, they are not invalid as a matter of law. … Evans also testified he believes this value is too high, clearly the Debtors believe they own substantial and valuable property rights which they seek to reorganize in their chapter 11 cases. I.

In Re Smith

267 B.R. 568 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 30, 2001

This has been held to be sufficient to qualify as an expert in the valuation of real property.”); Neuger v. … While he was permitted to testify as an expert witness, O’Neil’s lack of appraisal training and limited experience as an appraiser clearly affect the weight accorded to his testimony.

Mounier v. United States (In Re Mounier)

232 B.R. 186 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · Oct 6, 1998

The 10 percent penalty is assessed whenever an early withdrawal is made from a qualified pension plan, regardless of when the plan was established. … The tax resulting from the inclusion of the withdrawn amount in income is clearly a tax.

Eastman v. Baker Recovery Services (In Re Eastman)

419 B.R. 711 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Oct 15, 2009

Clearly, Baker’s testimony is contradictory on this point and simply not credible. … [nor] establish actual damages.”) (citing Neild, 453 F.Supp.2d at 923).

Heidkamp v. Fifth Third Bank (In Re Heidkamp)

334 B.R. 713 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 26, 2005

While a corporation or partnership may qualify for appointment as a panel trustee under the minimum qualification requirements, “[n]o professional corporation, partnership, or similar entity organized for the practice of … Fifth Third’s letters have clearly violated the automatic stay.

Dufrane v. Navient Solutions, Inc. (In re Dufrane)

566 B.R. 28 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Mar 23, 2017

D.N.D. 2011) (“Given the breadth afforded to the phrase ‘educational benefit,’ these facts clearly establish that the Chase loans were used to provide Debtor an educational benefit.”); and Sensient Tech. Corp. v. … educational loan from degenerating into a non-qualified loan” [and] '“it cannot be used to elevate a non-qualified educational loan into a qualified educational loan,” 18 See Murphy v.

Hollingworth v. Beneficial Massachusetts, Inc. (In Re Hollingworth)

453 B.R. 32 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 27, 2011

TILA establishes an 8% threshold before a loan qualifies as a high-cost home loan rather than the 5% threshold established by Chapter 183C. … As the regulation clearly indicates, however, if a creditor is a federally chartered institution, such as Key ban k, its transactions in Massachusetts are not exempt from TILA.

Rushton v. Kesler (In Re C.W. Mining Co.)

440 B.R. 878 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · Oct 1, 2010

DISCUSSION The Defendants’ involvement in this case began with an affirmative representation to this Court that they were professionals qualified to represent the Debtor under § 327 and that they would remain qualified to … The Defendants attempt to create a void where attorneys for an involuntary debtor in possession are not subject to the standards clearly imposed by the Bankruptcy Code.

Lyndel Toppin - Adversary Proceeding

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 2021

therefore diverges from the Williams court’s holding with respect to what constitutes a ministerial act and finds that the Sheriff’s Office’s post-petition actions in enforcing the CCP Court’s wit of possession do not qualify … In order to recover emotional distress damages for willful violation of the automatic stay, a party must (1) have suffered significant emotional distress, (2) clearly establish the significant emotional distress; and (3

Cullens v. District Court for the State of Colorado (In Re Cullens)

77 B.R. 825 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Sep 8, 1987

Plaintiff’s motion was granted at that hearing upon a determination that the merits of the motion concerned an unsettled area of the law and that the balance of hardships clearly favored the plaintiff. … Congress included two qualifying phrases; the fines must be both ‘to and for the benefit of a governmental unit,’ and ‘not compensation for actual pecuniary loss.’

In Re Nellson Nutraceutical, Inc.

356 B.R. 364 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Dec 4, 2006

The Court previously ruled during trial that the Debtors’ witness is qualified as an expert. … These factors are, “[1] the degree to which the expert testifying is qualified, [2] the relationship of a technique to ‘more established modes of scientific analysis,’ and [3] the ‘non-judicial uses to which the scientific

Federal Trade Commission v. Austin (In Re Austin)

138 B.R. 898 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 7, 1992

The Stipulation for Judgment clearly establishes that Austin made false representations. … As discussed above, the evidence in this case clearly establishes that Austin made false representations in the sale of certain artworks.

Fort v. State of Florida Department of Revenue

412 B.R. 840 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Virginia · Jun 30, 2009

Finally, the State argues that, insofar as the complaint seeks damages from the State of Florida, the action is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity as established by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution … First, on the merits of the motions before it, the court clearly ruled correctly.

Harris Trust & Savings Bank v. Wathen's Elevators, Inc. (In Re Wathen's Elevators, Inc.)

32 B.R. 912 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Kentucky · Sep 13, 1983

However, because these open-credit sellers dealt with an insolvent buyer, they clearly have an additional legal right, reclamation as provided by Sec. 2-702(2) of the UCC. C. … Our pivotal point is whether a secured creditor may qualify as a good faith purchaser with rights superior to a reclaimant.

In re Mooney

503 B.R. 916 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Georgia · Jan 3, 2014

Despite Debtor’s argument that HSAs are clearly exempt, nothing in O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100(a)(2) expressly exempts HSAs. … Congress established HSAs as a tax-favored means of saving for medical expenses in conjunction with a high-deductible health insurance policy.

Robertson v. Strickland (In Re Robertson)

333 B.R. 894 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 29, 2005

Therefore, Defendant qualifies as a creditor for purposes of TILA. … Furthermore, the evidence established that Plain *903 tiff knew the transaction constituted a mortgage and Plaintiff agreed to the mortgage in good faith.

In Re CEI Roofing, Inc.

315 B.R. 50 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Jul 7, 2004

When senior creditors consent or are clearly provided for, the bankruptcy court may authorize the payment of the prepetition priority employee wage claims. Id. at 493 n. 10. … In many instances, as in this case, the secured creditor and the professionals consent to the payment of the employee wage claims, thus eliminating the concern that the priorities established under the Code are being upset

Town of Skaneateles v. Scott (In Re Scott)

233 B.R. 32 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. New York · Oct 19, 1998

The evidence does not clearly indicate whether Debtor in fact spent the night at the motor home on June 16th and 17th. … In the present case, the damages awarded to the Town by Justice Pooler are clearly in the nature of compensation for pecuniary loss.

In Re Dzielak

435 B.R. 538 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 11, 2010

The court found that such “circumstances presented do not establish prejudice warranting a denial of the amended exemption claim.” Id. at 606 . … The Illinois Supreme Court has stated clearly that a “workers’ compensation award constitutes marital property [if] the claim accrued during the marriage of the parties.”